Obama Presidency Watch/post election & first 100 days

I was pleased by it... of course everyone thought it was a surprise but really it should have been expected... after all he was in the neighborhood.

It seems that Mr. Obama is doing everything he can to woo the troops... and this is not because he has never served either... we have had plenty of civilian presidents.

I suspect it is in large part because of the preception that he was/is soft on the military...

But there are many ways of being soft on the military... you can stick a flag on your car antenna and that is it... be just another beligerent arm chair warrior... you can be quick to use them either in battle or as a backdrop or a photo op and slow to support them when they come home... Or you can give them the greatest support that they need... when they come home injured in body or mind...

As a veteran myself I can assure you the fact that the president's budget proposal offers the VA 1.5 billion more than they requested has not gone unnoticed.

Still visiting the troops is always a good sign... just so long as you don't have a mission accomplished banner flying behind you with the job barely begun.


[edit on 8-4-2009 by grover]

reply to post by xpert11


Nothing more than PO all presidents do it, after all the reason our soldiers are in foreign nations is due to the government decisions.

Still Obama enjoy his popularity and charisma but no for too long.

His budget for the next 6 month of the year is now toping almost 1 trillion dollars, the Tarp will be extended to everybody but the tax payer (somebody has to pay) and the financial are still insolvent.

The modern day depression is heading our way and is nothing like it was back during the first one in this one we are to reverse all those 70 years of good wealth and good fortune.

All this will happen under Obama and is nothing he can do about it.



[edit on 8-4-2009 by marg6043]

OKAY everybody... its the end (or damn near it, my math sucks ) of the first 100 days... score cards please.

I give him an A on most issues especially foreign policies
an A+ on his releasing the torture memos
Generally a B on the economy
I give him a C on the whole bailout thing

and I give him a triple A+ for annoying the hell out of the right wing.

reply to post by grover

OKAY everybody... it’s the end (or damn near it, my math sucks) of the first 100 days... score cards please. I give him an A on most issues especially foreign policies an A+ on his releasing the torture memos Generally a B on the economy I give him a C on the whole bailout thing and I give him a triple A+ for annoying the hell out of the right wing.

In reverse order, the R/W takes itself all too seriously, and have little or no sense of humor, nor do they have any humility! If you can’t laugh at yourself, who can you laugh at?

Bailout a C? I think everyone said it would be 12-15 months before we knew if anything was working or not working Yet I noted that in just 7 days, the “pundits” were asking “Where’s the beef?”

Well, on the economy, the 2010 budget starting on October 1 has not been passed yet. You know the Republicans are plotting to block him in the Senate. Speaking of which, has Minnesota just given up on deciding their second senate seat? Maybe they will wait until 2014? I say it ought to be law that in any race over 1 million votes cast, and decided by fewer than 1,000 votes, should be redone!

Bravo on the foreign policy and torture memos. I have one warning for Dick Cheney, who is trying an old Soviet RE-WRITE of history trick, be careful or you will get your wish! Cheney has enough s**t on his hands to fertilize a good size garden! And Herr Oberfuhrer Rumsfeld better hope this is not as through a look-see as it could be. Liddy is still out there and may be vulnerable to a second trial.

January 11 days, February 28 days, subtotal 39, March 31 days, subtotal 70 days, April 30 days and TOTAL 100 DAYS!


Foot Note On May Day.
The Haymarket riot or Haymarket massacre was a disturbance that took place on Tuesday May 4, 1886, at the Haymarket Square in Chicago. It started as a rally in support of striking workers. A person threw a bomb at police as they dispersed the public meeting. The ensuing gunfire resulted in the deaths of eight police officers and an unknown number of strikers. (Note, back then we did not count POOR people who were killed by the police or Army). In the internationally publicized legal proceedings that followed, eight anarchists say strikers were tried for murder. Four were put to death and one committed suicide in prison. The Haymarket affair is generally considered to have been an important influence on the origin of international May Day observances for workers. In Europe, but NOT in America. en.wikipedia.org...


[edit on 4/22/2009 by donwhite]

reply to post by donwhite


This was just posted on yahoo news this morning:

AP Poll: Americans high on Obama, direction of US
news.yahoo.com...

For the first time in years, more Americans than not say the country is headed in the right direction, a sign that Barack Obama has used the first 100 days of his presidency to lift the public's mood and inspire hopes for a brighter future.

Intensely worried about their personal finances and medical expenses, Americans nonetheless appear realistic about the time Obama might need to turn things around, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll. It shows most Americans consider their new president to be a strong, ethical and empathetic leader who is working to change Washington.

Nobody knows how long the honeymoon will last, but Obama has clearly transformed the yes-we-can spirit of his candidacy into a tool of governance. His ability to inspire confidence — Obama's second book is titled "The Audacity of Hope" — has thus far buffered the president against the harsh political realities of two wars, a global economic meltdown and countless domestic challenges.

"He presents a very positive outlook," said Cheryl Wetherington, 35, an independent voter who runs a chocolate shop in Gardner, Kan. "He's very well-spoken and very vocal about what direction should be taken."

Other AP-GfK findings could signal trouble for Obama:

_While there is evidence that people feel more optimistic about the economy, 65 percent said it's difficult for them and their families to get ahead. More than one-third know of a family member who recently lost a job.

_More than 90 percent of Americans consider the economy an important issue, the highest ever in AP polling.

_Nearly 80 percent believe that the rising federal debt will hurt future generations, and Obama is getting mixed reviews at best for his handling of the issue.

And yet, the percentage of Americans saying the country is headed in the right direction rose to 48 percent, up from 40 percent in February. Forty-four percent say the nation is on the wrong track.

Not since January 2004, shortly after the capture of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, has an AP survey found more "right direction" than "wrong direction" respondents. The burst of optimism didn't last long in 2004.

And it doesn't happen much.

So based on that poll the population is giving him a positive rating.

Also Robert Riech has posted his report card:

A Report Card on Obamanomics, Approaching One Hundred Days
tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com...

The Administration is coming up to that magical 100-day mark, at which point measures are taken of how a new president is doing. As a university professor I'm accustomed to giving grades. So here's my report card on Obamanomics so far:

The 10-year budget gets an A. It's an extraordinary vision of what America can and should become, including universal health insurance and environmental protections against climate change. And the budget takes a little bit more from the rich and gives a little bit more back to the poor and lower middle class, which seems appropriate given that the income gap is wider than it's been since the 1920s. I'd give the budget an A plus except for its far-too-rosy economic projections.

The stimulus package gets a B. Good as far as it goes but doesn't go nearly far enough. $787 billion over two years sounds like a lot of stimulus. But the economy is operating at about a trillion and a half dollars below its capacity this year alone. And considering that the states are cutting services and increasing taxes to the tune of $350 billion over this year and next, the stimulus is even smaller.

The last grade is for the bank bailouts. I give them an F. I'm a big fan of this administration, but I've got to be honest. The bailouts are failing. So far American taxpayers have shoveled out almost $600 billion. Yet the banks are lending less money than they did five months ago. Bank executives are still taking home princely sums, their toxic assets and non-performing loans are growing, and the banks are still cooking their books. And now the Treasury is talking about converting taxpayer dollars into bank equity, which exposes taxpayers to even greater losses.

And according to them the right wing does have a sense of humor... after all humor is what they call the hate and ignorance mush loosebowels, ann coulter and their ilk spews forth.



[edit on 23-4-2009 by grover]

reply to post by grover

From Robert Reich's Blog
The Administration is coming up to that magical 100-day mark, at which point measures are taken of how a new president is doing. As a university professor I'm accustomed to giving grades. So here's my report card on Obamanomics so far:

So that's the report card. An A on the budget, B on the stimulus, and F on the bailout. On the whole (given how I weigh grades) that gives Obamanomics a C+. Not bad given the magnitude of the problems Obama inherited. But by the same token, not nearly good enough.

The last grade is for the bank bailouts. I give them an F. I'm a big fan of this administration, but I've got to be honest. The bailouts are failing. So far American taxpayers have shoveled out almost $600 billion. Yet the banks are lending less money than they did five months ago.

If I’m correct Mr Grover, you spoke approvingly of Robert Reich’s onions expressed above. He put that to print on April 21. (I miscounted the 100th day by 1 day. I failed to count January 20).

Mr Reich - who I respect a lot - said this above: “American taxpayers have shoveled out almost $600 billion. Yet the banks are lending less money than they did five months ago.”

I must assume without knowing that there is a link to the Federal Reserve System website which will tell us the overnight numbers, the bank to bank loans for the previous day and maybe even put the info into meaningful categories. Like commercial, residential, and etc.

I know - also without testing - that if I call a bank, any bank, and ask them “How much money did you loan yesterday?” they will either hang up on me, or call the police that I am making a prank call or if I repeat it, that I am harassing them.

Harassment is a misdemeanor punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. So how’s our system differ from Vladimir Putin’s system?

In any case it seems that banks are beginning to make bank to bank loans which was the category we were scared about. I noticed today on CNN - which after the Time Warner acquisition is almost as bad as FOX if you haven’t noticed - I now call CNN FOX Jr* - that 10,000 small town commercial banks are going public with advertising they are NOT like the flamboyant Disney-land mega banks we are hearing all about. Those banks actually follow GOOD banking practices and never stopped making loans to good customers.

As we recently witnessed by Mr. Obama’s “not looking back, but looking forward” remark when he announced the public release of the White House internal memos advocating torture despite it violating international law - with the proviso that “provided the practitioners had not exceeded ‘legal’ limits - then the Democrats in the House saying “Whoa Up There Boy!” [Yes, I know, “boy” is pejorative when referring to any black man, but hey, if you can’t make a joke what can you do?]

First, I agreed with President Obama. Then I agreed with the House. We all KNOW why the Republicans are SCARED TO DEATH over any serious inquiry by a House committee. Those lawyers who wrote those patently FALSE memos were actually doing it on ORDERS from VP Cheney and President Bush! They tasked AG Ashcroft for COVER! And he gave it to them. This was a TOP down legal opinion - say justification - and not a BOTTOM up distillation of the law. There won’t be any prosecution but this will go FAR to SULLY the already wretched nightmare left behind by the Bush/Cheney/Rice team called his L E G A C Y.

* When Larry King dies - he like Andy Rooney will never retire - the conversion of CNN into FOX Jr will be complete. Nancy Grace will take over as CEO under Rupert Murdoch’s tutelage, and we will begin holding murder trials on live tv! Nancy Grace like her elder sister Marcia Clark of LA, makes me wonder if either of them got their jobs standing up? Slum-dwellers or bottom feeders! Yes for sure and both are too smart by half!

[edit on 5/12/2009 by donwhite]

reply to post by grover

So that's the report card. An A on the budget, B on the stimulus, and F on the bailout. On the whole (given how I weigh grades) that gives Obamanomics a C-plus. Not bad given the magnitude of the problems Obama inherited. But by the same token, not nearly good enough.

I think I agree with Robert Reich.

Overall the only real thing I have disliked about Obama's first 6 months is his handling of the bailouts... but then again remember all that was pretty much waiting for him from before the election... bush minor and Paulson started the ball rolling and as for the big three they also came a beggin on their own, no one forced them and again it was started before he took office.

I really don't grudge him auto but he should have been much harsher on the banks and investment houses for their roll in this mess...

AND I do not like Giether.

reply to post by grover


Grover, that's good to hear that you're critical of a man you were bonkers over. To me, that's the only constructive viewpoint we can have for the people we support. I know we've been rounds over Obama in the past, but now more than every, I would like to hear what you and others would have to say about your view for a president you voted for and I so adamantly resisted. We've had our rounds over Obama, and it is what it is. All we can do now is come together and learn from this entire process, for better or worse.

Geitner is a little worm, isn't he?

I've come around to find commonality with Obama in his presidency. I really believe that their are other variables at play and even if he did want to act on his charitable instincts, there's no way he is going to. The way he appointed members of his cabinet didn't seem like he was in charge of those decisions, but that someway, somehow they or somebody just like them with a different letter (D or R) would be appointed regardless. He has been the perfect enabler for the the FED/Banks (Geitner), Big Agriculture (Vilsack), Israel (Emanuel), Military Industrial Complex (Clinton), and a host of other calls that would seem "stupid" or "erroneous," but are perfect for those variables who have already established their power in our government. It is my belief that Obama has become an enabler, just as he was destined to become. Every person who has filled this position and tried to rebel in favor of your commonman is 6 feet deeper than they were before they tried.

reply to post by DeadFlagBlues


I was never an Obama supporter per say. I was in favor of either Edwards, Richardson or Clarke in the primaries.

I have come to like and respect him though but you are correct that there are variables at work... no president is as truly powerful and free to do what he would like as most people think...

Even the most partisan president changes after the round of briefings... and as far as I have ever been able to assertain the briefings go something like this...

Keep the powers that be happy and play your part and you can have a second term... if you cause trouble the secret service can look the other way or we can find other ways of bringing you down.

And if they play along they are given enough rope to do some things, if not they are reigned in.

Still I am glad he is president I shudder to think what things would be like right now if McCain had gotten elected and Palin was a heart beat away.

reply to post by grover


I started out for Hillary. I know she has faults but she was 10 X smarter than John McCain and 100 X more responsible that he proved to be when out of the blue in SMACKING America in the face with Sarah Palin.

Big John traded his hero status for a Get out of Jail Free card in the Keating Five scandal back in those halcyon days of Ronnie Reagan. From that day until this day, Big John is in debt! To someone.

I say Obama made it to the presidency with 2 turning point events. The first was in Iowa when Oprah came up to see him and held a private conversation with him. Whatever she said, he was a NEW man from that day forward. To paraphrase from my own imagination, I’d say she said this or words to this effect. “Boy, [she could call him boy] I don’t care much where you stand, but you have got to stand somewhere. Get out there and MAKE WAVES!” He did.

The next turning point was the February, ‘08 speech in Philadelphia in which he explained his religion and his former pastor, retired Reverend Jeremiah Wright. That was one of his BEST speeches; I knew then he was MY MAN and would be the next president of the US.


[edit on 6/10/2009 by donwhite]

That speech was certainly a high point... I was really impressed recently with his speech in Cairo.

If bush minor had risen to the occasion after 9/11 instead of getting a war-on and addressed the issues that divide Islam and the west, and more importantly the ideals that unite us... perhaps, just perhaps the history of the past 4 years would have different.

Obama's speech will echo throughout the middle east because each leader, Jewish, Christian and Muslim will have to address it... now if the man can at least make the effort to live up to the rhetoric.

Originally posted by grover
That speech was certainly a high point... I was really impressed recently with his speech in Cairo.

Sure the speech was impressive but actions speak louder then words . So far in other policy areas Obama actions have differed vastly from his words . Take the case of a New Zealand - US trade relations . On the phone to John Key Obama was positive about presumable a FTA agreement with New Zealand as a part of the Pacific Four agreement . In the next instance Obama slapped subsidies on US diary farmers .

Obama's speech will echo throughout the middle east because each leader, Jewish, Christian and Muslim will have to address it... now if the man can at least make the effort to live up to the rhetoric.

Well you will have to forgive for being sceptical there has been about thirty years worth of rhetoric concerning the ME region . I do wish Obama well in his quest to repair the damage done to the US image by the Iraq misadventure . On another note IMO it could be possible that Obama back flips on his decision to close to Guantánamo Bay because all the supporters of that policy don't want any of the detainees in there neighbourhood .

His speech will echo throughout the mid-east and will have to be addressed by the leaders there (Neytanyahoo already has one planned for I think this week) because it was made in the middle east to people living there and addressing issues between us. That is what makes it different and potentially positive.

OK here is my my take on Obama and the Middle East . IMO there is a lot of back door diplomacy going on in order to bring about a thawing of relations between the US and Iran . Hard liners in both countries oppose such a move . Obama faces oppsition to détente with Iran because Only Nixon could go to China . Iran and other regimes in the region have brainwashed there people into thinking that the US is responseible for all there ills . The other thing to bear in mind is the vast cultural differences that existed between the western world and the people of the Middle East region .

I am afriad that my above post wasn't very specific . Obama wont make any head way with the Israel - Palestine problem . A thawing of US - Iran would be beneficial because in exchange for the easing of sanctions greater cop operation could be gained in the efforts to deal the troublesome Pakistan - Afghanistan border . Iran has troubles with general lawless in that area . I am still concerned about Iran's Nuclear Program but the threat of Afghanistan returning to Taliban is a greater threat to global security .

reply to post by xpert11

On Obama and the Middle East. IMO there is a lot of back door diplomacy going on to bring about a thawing of relations between the US and Iran. Hard liners in both countries oppose such a move. Obama faces opposition to detente with Iran because Only Nixon could go to China.

Our failed and messy Iranian rescue attempt was under Jimmy Carter. While he is alive and well - my ex-president hero - he is in disfavor with so many Dems as well as the reactionary GOP, that he would not be able to carry the necessary prestige to Tehran. Hillary has too much on her plate already so she cannot spare the 2-3 weeks of prep time before making such a journey. I’m thinking former senator John Warner of VA would be a good man to send?

Iran and other regimes in the region have brainwashed their people into thinking that the US is responsible for all their ills.

Republican and Democratic regimes here have brainwashed their people into thinking that Iran is responsible for all these ills.

Obama won’t make any head way with the Israel - Palestine problem. A thawing of US - Iran would be beneficial because in exchange for the easing of sanctions greater co-operation could be gained in the efforts to deal the troublesome Pakistan - Afghan border.

Netanyahu is to make a speech this week in response to the two speeches of Obama - one here, one in Cairo - that put the ball squarely in Israel’s court. If we can decipher what he will say, then we can figure how the future will look. I’ve already pointed out here that I heard Kadima leader Tzipi Livni say she BACKED Netanyahu in his foreign policy vis a vis Iran and in his attempts to SQUELCH the on-going resentment of Arabs in general and in the Occupied Territories and Gaza in particular. This was on Fareed Zakari CNN Sunday show.

I am still concerned about Iran's Nuclear Program but the threat of Afghanistan returning to Taliban is a greater threat to global security.

Get over it! The cat is out of the bag. The nuclear free earth window has closed. The NPT is a dead letter. There Is no hurried or even casual concern to put the cat back into the bag. On the contrary, the US “blessed” India and by implication, has “blessed” Pakistan. We are the plutonium supplier to Israel so that issue is not even on the table. With India - 70 -100 bombs - and Pakistan - 60 and building more - and Israel - 200 or more - and North Korea - 2 to 10 - there is NO WAY a strategically located, regionally powerful and self respecting country like Iran is going to NEUTER itself!

[edit on 6/13/2009 by donwhite]

reply to post by DeadFlagBlues

[Obama] has been the perfect enabler for the FED/Banks (Geitner), Big Agriculture (Vilsack), Israel (Emanuel), Military Industrial Complex (Clinton), and a host of other calls that would seem "stupid" or "erroneous," but are perfect for those variables who have already established their power in our government.

Obama said he wanted to change the operational normative in W-DC. Stop the grid lock. He is trying. Yes, he could have found appointees who were much more strident in undoing the anti-liberal policies of the past 8 or 16 years. I think Obama reads history that big changes can only come when times are REALLY hard. In early and middle ‘08 it was not so apparent how intertwined our economy was connected to the world and was itself saddled with obligations it could not meet. Private enterprise had overreached. To prevent a total meltdown, extreme measures had to be taken. It looks as if those measures have slowed if not stopped the crash, and there are some signs of the economy now looking the other way such as in new home sales.

Yes, I for one would like to have seen a new AAA - Agriculture Adjustment Act - and a re-invigorated RFC - Reconstruction Finance Corporation a/k/a the Blue Eagle - a WPA - Works Progress Administration and a PWA - Public Works Administration and for real, a CCC - Civilian Conservation Corps. Not to mention a return to the FAIRNESS doctrine by the FCC. And shutting down the sole ownership waivers for media in too many cities. But when FDR came to office in 1933 there was somewhere between 25% and 33% of the workforce OUT of work. NO unemployment compensation. No minimum wage. NO 40 hours workweek. And etc. People were ready for DRASTIC and SEVERE changes. We are not there yet. And hopefully we will not get there.

It is my belief that Obama has become an enabler, just as he was destined to become. Every person who has filled this position and tried to rebel in favor of your common man is 6 feet deeper than they were before they tried.

Inertia. A body at rest tends to remain at rest unless acted on by an outside force. Harder to overcome in a social setting than in a physics setting. However we want to define it, people prefer stability, security and predictability to pure democracy and radical changes in their basic institutions. The devil you know is better than the devil you do not know.

reply to post by donwhite


If I was Obama and the time came for a formal diplomatic trip to Iran I wouldn't be delegating the role to Hillary I would go myself .
Before Nixon made his famous visit to China I think that kissinger or State Department officials made secret visits to China to make way for what was to come .

Don take a deep breath and ask yourself would you trust any regime with a Holocaust denier in its mist with even the possibility of them gaining Nuclear Weapons ?

Such is the mantle of leadership that risks and threats have to be weighted up . Unlike in WW2 the us vs them mentality has proven to be harmful in the War On Terror .

reply to post by xpert11

If I was Obama and the time came for a formal diplomatic trip to Iran I wouldn't be delegating the role to Hillary I would go myself .
Before Nixon made his famous visit to China I think that kissinger or State Department officials made secret visits to China to make way for what was to come.

You are right about Kissinger going on ahead of Nixon to China. I just finished a book, “Nixon and Mao: The Week That Changed The World” by Margaret MacMillan, 2007. Due to on-going periodic releases of the Nixon tapes, she had access to more first hand material than any prior author on the subject of Nixon. The author relies heavily on Kissinger - still alive - for recounting the events of that week. Dr K plays UP his role and puts DOWN Mr. Nixon’s role. The only good thing I can say about Dr. K is all of his predictions turn out to be wrong. Once he was the top pay on the American heavyweight lecture circuit, making $250,000 for a hour’s worth of self flattery. Of which he never fails to deliver.

Heads of government rarely if ever go out to do the negotiating. When they do meet, the job is finished and they go to make the public announcements and lead the hurrah! I think that practice dates back to the Egyptian pharaohs and Persian monarchs. No leader would dare to risk his political capital on an uncertain outcome. I don’t look for Obama to fly off to Tehran since Ahmadi-nejad seems to have won re-election handily. Once again, the West was self-indulged and mislead on the electoral potential of the so-called REFORM candidates. We obviously do not have MUCH intelligence about Iran “on the ground.” Notwithstanding that Obama will still be working towards reconciliation with Iran.

. . take a deep breath and ask would you trust any regime with a Holocaust denier in its mist with even the possibility of them gaining Nuclear Weapons?

It is still my opinion that Ahmadi-nejad is full of combative rhetoric and bombast! After all, he has to appeal to his BASE too. We have “blown” any organized effort to block Iran and its nuclear weapons. Do you hear the UK, or France, or Russia, or China, calling for intervention? (With the US the original Big 5 atom bomb powers). I don’t. I only hear the US and Israel calling “wolf” and which two are joined at the hip which the world knows. Shucks, we can’t even stop the North Koreans from getting nuclear weapons. Before it actually happened us one world intellectuals would have rated that about as likely as Somali getting atom bombs.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty has no support outside W-DC and Jerusalem.

Such is the mantle of leadership that risks and threats have to be weighted up. Unlike in WW2 the US vs them mentality has proven to be harmful in the War On Terror.

The sooner we all abandon the phoney War on Terror proclaimed by the ill-informed Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice Gang of Four, we will be the better for it. Since 1950 the Executive branch has run rough-shod over the Legislative branch. It’s this simple: ONE voice versus 535 voices all saying different things. Congress is a modern day Tower of Babel compared to the one voice of the Presidency. The American public is flummoxed.


PS. I am presently reading “The War of the World: Twentieth Century Conflict and the Descent of the West” by Niall Ferguson. 2006. See Note 1. The author devotes a considerable part of the book to reciting the near universal harsh persecution of Jews in eastern and central Europe during the 21 year interval between the two great wars.

Poland was especially disgusting in this vein which reminds me that Pope John Paul 2 - on the Vatican’s fast track for sainthood - lived but 27 miles from Auschwitz. I swear when watching his speech offering the late-in-coming “official” Church apology for its role in the Holocaust, JP2 nearly choked! Was he sincere? If the Roman Curia runs the Church, then its choices of the last TWO popes have certainly got Jewish BLOOD on their hands. The "Crrist Killers" theologgy dies hard!


Note 1. Niall Ferrguson (born April 18, 1964, in Glasgow) is a British historian who specializes in financial and economic history as well as the history of empire. He is the Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University and the William Ziegler Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School. He was educated at the private Glasgow Academy in Scotland, and at Magdalen College, Oxford.

He is best known outside academia for his revisionist views rehabilitating imperialism and colonialism; within academia, his championing of counterfactual history is a subject of some considerable controversy. In 2008, the Allen Lane Company published his most recent book, “The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World” which he also presented as a Channel 4 television series.
en.wikipedia.org...


[edit on 6/14/2009 by donwhite]

Don I have a question for you .

Just what exactly do you think Obama should treat as a threat to either a threat to the US or global security and what constitutes such threats ?

Cheers xpert11 .